Citation Nr: 1318720	
Decision Date: 06/10/13    Archive Date: 06/21/13

DOCKET NO.  09-20 022	)	DATE
	)
	)

On appeal from the
Department of Veterans Affairs Regional Office in Boston, Massachusetts


THE ISSUE

Entitlement to service connection for residuals of a back disability.  




REPRESENTATION

Appellant represented by:	Disabled American Veterans




ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD

J. Andrew Ahlberg, Counsel




INTRODUCTION

The Veteran served on active duty from February 1953 to February 1955.  

This case comes before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) on appeal from a January 2007 rating decision by the above Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO).  In addition to the issue remaining on appeal, this decision denied service connection for hearing loss and tinnitus, and the Veteran perfected an appeal to the Board with respect to these issues as well.  However, as a November 2012 rating decision granted service connection for hearing loss and tinnitus, the only issue remaining on appeal is as listed on the Title Page. 

Please note this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2012).  38 U.S.C.A. § 7107(a)(2) (West 2002).

The appeal is REMANDED to the RO via the Appeals Management Center (AMC), in Washington, DC.  VA will notify the appellant if further action is required.


REMAND

The Veteran was scheduled for a hearing at the RO before a Veterans Law Judge in March 2013 but the Veteran, according to March 2013 statement, was not able to attend this hearing due to inclement weather.  In this statement, it was also requested that the Veteran be afforded a videoconference hearing before a Veterans Law Judge.  The undersigned has reviewed the motion from the Veteran's representative and determined that good cause for scheduling the Veteran for a videoconference hearing is shown.  See 38 C.F.R. § 20.702(c). 

Because the Board may not proceed with an adjudication of the Veteran's claim without affording him the opportunity for such a hearing, and because videoconference hearings are scheduled by the RO, a remand is required.  See 38 U.S.C.A. § 7107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 20.700.

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED for the following action:

(Please note, this appeal has been advanced on the Board's docket pursuant to 38 C.F.R. § 20.900(c) (2012).  Expedited handling is requested.)

The Veteran should be scheduled for a videoconference before a Veterans Law Judge at the RO pursuant to 38 U.S.C.A. § 7107(e).  The case should then be processed in accordance with established appellate practices.

The appellant has the right to submit additional evidence and argument on the matter the Board has remanded.  Kutscherousky v. West, 12 Vet. App. 369 (1999).

This claim must be afforded expeditious treatment.  The law requires that all claims that are remanded by the Board of Veterans' Appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims for additional development or other appropriate action must be handled in an expeditious manner.  See 38 U.S.C.A. §§ 5109B, 7112 (West Supp. 2012).


_________________________________________________
ROBERT E. SULLIVAN
Veterans Law Judge, Board of Veterans' Appeals

Under 38 U.S.C.A. § 7252 (West 2002), only a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.  This remand is in the nature of a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of the Board on the merits of your appeal.  38 C.F.R. § 20.1100(b) (2012).